The Effect of Different Substrates on H₂S and N₂ Production in Biogas Production

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and nitrogen (N2) ratio of biogas produced from various combinations of cattle waste (CW), three different Switchgrass (SG) (Panicum virgatum L.) plant varieties (Kanlow (SG1), Shawne (SG2), Alamo (SG3) and sugar beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) leaves (BL). In the study, a laboratory-scale biomethane application setup was established to determine the biogas potential. Within the scope of the research, a trial design was created as 1st application group, 2nd application group and 3rd application group. In the established application setup, biogas measurements were recorded in a computer environment for 16 days, 30 days and 43 days, considering the end of biogas production of the materials. During the measurements, temperature and pH values were checked at certain periods and mixing was done by shaking by hand every day. Applications were carried out considering 10% dry matter ratio. Methane (CH4) in biogas is a valuable energy source, other components constitute a major obstacle to the commercial use of biogas. The variable composition is due to the various materials that can be used for the production of biogas. In the study, the effect of H2S and N2 ratios of biogas obtained from mixtures of different materials at different ratios on biogas production was investigated. As a result of the measurements made, the biogas components of each mixture were measured using a gas analyzer. H2S and N2 ratios obtained from different substrates were determined. The highest H2S ratio was measured from cattle waste with 12 ppm, and the highest N2 ratio was measured in the CW-SG3 mixture with 32.1%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hydrogen sulfide
• Nitrogen
• Renewable energy
• Biogas
• Biomass

Biyogaz Üretiminde Farklı Sübstratların H₂S ve N₂ Üretimi Üzerindeki Etkisi

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and nitrogen (N2) ratio of biogas produced from various combinations of cattle waste (CW), three different Switchgrass (SG) (Panicum virgatum L.) plant varieties (Kanlow (SG1), Shawne (SG2), Alamo (SG3) and sugar beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) leaves (BL). In the study, a laboratory-scale biomethane application setup was established to determine the biogas potential. Within the scope of the research, a trial design was created as 1st application group, 2nd application group and 3rd application group. In the established application setup, biogas measurements were recorded in a computer environment for 16 days, 30 days and 43 days, considering the end of biogas production of the materials. During the measurements, temperature and pH values were checked at certain periods and mixing was done by shaking by hand every day. Applications were carried out considering 10% dry matter ratio. Methane (CH4) in biogas is a valuable energy source, other components constitute a major obstacle to the commercial use of biogas. The variable composition is due to the various materials that can be used for the production of biogas. In the study, the effect of H2S and N2 ratios of biogas obtained from mixtures of different materials at different ratios on biogas production was investigated. As a result of the measurements made, the biogas components of each mixture were measured using a gas analyzer. H2S and N2 ratios obtained from different substrates were determined. The highest H2S ratio was measured from cattle waste with 12 ppm, and the highest N2 ratio was measured in the CW-SG3 mixture with 32.1%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hydrogen sulfide
• Nitrogen
• Renewable energy
• Biogas
• Biomass

Kaynakça

1. Ahn HK, Smith M, Kondrad S, White J. 2010. Evaluation of biogas production potential by dry anaerobic digestion of switchgrass–animal manure mixtures. Applied Biochem Biotech, 160: 965-975.
2. Allegue LB, Hinge J, Allé K. 2012. Biogas and bio-syngas upgrading. Danish Technol Institut, 2012: 5-97.
3. Anonymous. 2023a. Biogas formation stages, biogas usage areas. URL: https://bepa.enerji.gov.tr/ (accessed date: September 24, 2023).
4. Anonymous. 2023b. Some materials used in biogas production. URL: https://bepa.enerji.gov.tr/ (accessed date: September 24, 2023).
5. Buğutekin A. 2007. Atıklardan biyogaz üretiminin incelenmesi. Ph.D. Thesis, Marmara University, Institute of Science, İstanbul, Türkiye, pp: 157.
6. Ciggin A. 2016. Anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge with switchgrass: Experimental and kinetic evaluation. Energy Sourc Part A: Recov Util Environ, 38 (1): 15-21.
7. Deublein D, Steinhauser A. 2008. Biogas from waste and renewable resources. Wiley, Weinheim, Germany, 2nd ed, pp: 539.
8. Durgut FT. 2020. Deneysel amaçlı prototip bir biyogaz reaktörünün imalatı ve farklı biyokütle karışımları ve ortamlarda performansının değerlendirilmesi. Ph.D. Thesis, Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University, Institute of Science, Tekirdağ, Türkiye, pp: 88.

9. Filikci C. 2024. Bazı bitkisel ve hayvansal atıklar ile dallı darı (Panicum Virgatum L.) karışımlarının biyogaz veriminin incelenmesi. Ph.D. Thesis, Selçuk University, Institute of Science, Konya, Türkiye, pp: 87.
10. Ghatak MD, Mahanta P. 2016. Biogas purification using chemical absorption. Inter J Engin Technol, 8(3): 1600-1605.
11. Huertas JI, Giraldo N, Izquierdo S. 2011. Removal of H2S and CO2 from Biogas by Amine Absorption. Mass Trans Chem Engin Proces, 307: 133-150.
12. Karlsson A, Björn Annika S, Shakeri Y, Svensson B. 2014. Improvement of the biogas production process: Explorative project (EP1). Biogas Research Center (BRC) Report: 2, In: Linköping University Electronic Press, Linkoping, Sweden, pp:73
13. Khalil M, Berawi MA, Heryanto R, Rizalie A. 2019. Waste to energy technology: The potential of sustainable biogas production from animal waste in Indonesia. Renew Sustain Ener Rev, 105: 323-331.
14. Lehtomäki A, Huttunen S, Rintala J. 2007. Laboratory investigations on co-digestion of energy crops and crop residues with cow manure for methane production: effect of crop to manure ratio. Res Conserv Recycl, 51 (3): 591-609.
15. Liew LN, Shi J, Li Y. 2012. Methane production from solid-state anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass. Biomass Bioen, 46: 125-132.
16. Nagamani B, Ramasamy K. 1999. Biogas production technology: an Indian perspective. Current Sci, 1999: 44-55.
17. Samson RA, Omielan JA. 1992. Switchgrass: A potential biomass energy crop for ethanol production. The Thirteenth North American Prairie conference, Windsor, Ontario, USA, pp:253-258.
18. Sanderson MA, Reed R, McLaughlin S, Wullschleger SD, Conger BV, Parrish D, Wolf D, Taliaferro C, Hopkins A, Ocumpaugh W. 1996. Switchgrass as a sustainable bioenergy crop. Bioresour Technol, 56 (1): 83-93.
19. Šarapatka B. 1993. A study of biogas production during anaerobic fermentation of farmyard manure. Biomass and Bioenergy, 5(5): 387-393.
20. Sheets JP, Ge X, Li Y. 2015. Effect of limited air exposure and comparative performance between thermophilic and mesophilic solid-state anaerobic digestion of switchgrass. Bioresour Technol, 180:296-303.
21. Song Y, Mahdy A, Hou Z, Lin M, Stinner W, Qiao W, Dong R. 2020. Air Supplement as a Stimulation Approach for the In Situ Desulfurization and Methanization Enhancement of Anaerobic Digestion of Chicken Manure. Ener Fuels, 34(10): 12606–12615.
22. Von Mitzlaff, K. 1988. Engines for biogas. Deutsche Zentrum fur Entwicklungstechnologien, Berlin, Germany, pp: 132.